<![CDATA[Preliminary evidence examination (pemeriksaan bukti permulaan or bukper) in Indonesian taxation is conducted before a case is elevated to investigation and aims to obtain preliminary evidence of an alleged tax crime. In practice, several actions taken by examiners particularly the borrowing of documents and the acquisition of electronic data, resemble coercive measures under criminal procedural law. This study analyses the legality of bukper procedures, the legal status of evidence borrowing, and the implications for pretrial review following the enactment of Law Number 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), effective since 2 January 2026. It employs normative legal research using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches, examining nine pretrial rulings and two Constitutional Court decisions. The findings show that bukper is normatively equivalent to inquiry and should contain no coercive measures; that evidence borrowing not genuinely based on the taxpayer's voluntary consent qualifies as a seizure-like action requiring district court authorization; and that the lex specialist argument cannot justify derogation from KUHAP where the legal basis is merely a ministerial regulation. Constitutional Court Decision Number 83/PUU-XXI/2023 declared both paragraph (1) and paragraph (4) of Article 43A of the General Tax Provisions Law (UU KUP) conditionally unconstitutional, so that even the delegation of bukper procedures to a ministerial regulation may not concern coercive measures. The new KUHAP reinforces this position. The study recommends regulating bukper at the statutory level with judicial control mechanisms.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
